About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8
of you. and let me read this. the city of mcallister is currently work hard to rebalance our budget after a sudden downturn in our revenue over the past two months. as you know, municipalities are required to maintain a balanced budget. it is a law in oklahoma you have to have a balanced budget. so what has he done? first step, we implemented a hiring freeze. they reassigned workers. refer knew shortfall was stimulussed at $1.2 million so every other expense category including supplies, repatience maintenance, fuel, travel, training consulting services and legal services had their budgets reduced. in other words they responded. none of these cuts are without pain but all will be accomplished while maintaining essential city services. now, for mcallister, a $1.2 million budget cut is a bigger hit than we're talking about with sequestration. and yet if the mayor of a 25,000 population community can make the adjustments to serve his constituency without decreasing services why can't we? and i had a ask unanimous -- and i'd ask unanimous consent to enter this into the record. the presiding of
american experiment as a city on a hill. indeed, our hymn, "america the beautiful," sings about our alabaster cities gleam. president kennedy's inaugural address said that the glow from our fire can truly light the world. and a generation later president obama's first inaugural noted that our ideals still light the world. we americans, we've described ourselves as a beacon of hope, a light in the darkness, our lamp lifted up in welcome and in example. daniel webster years ago said that our founders set the world an example. that was what the founding of america meant. our founders set the world an example. president clinton has pointed out that the power of our example -- the power of that example in the world has always been greater than any example of our power. that was the way bill clinton described it. and when daniel webster said that our founding fathers had set before the world an example, he went on to say this -- and i quote -- "the last hopes of mankind therefore rest with us. and if it should be proclaimed that our example had become an argument against the experiment, t
advantage of it, without unduly exposing it to our adversaries. let me move on to private city and civil liberties. anytime you're talking about sharing the information, sharing information with respect to cybersecurity, you have to be conscious of privacy and civil liberties and you have to make sure those are protected. that has been a priority of the administration and it continues to be so. so, while there are perhaps fewer concerns in the executive order because the focus is on sharing information outward, we have established a robust, oversight regime and in particular we have highlighted the fips. that is the government speak, right? if i don't insert an acronym every two or three minutes it is just not fun. the fips are the fair information practice principles. these date back to the 1970's when they were developed dealing with health records. essentially it is what are the principles you need to use in considering privacy with respect to information? so we think it's important we establish these as a one of the principles that we're going to follow with respect to sharing inform
maybe 300. this was a project with the city of chicago and the state of illinois both giving funding from u.s. department of energy and state of illinois capital funds. so in 2009 the governor before anyone was really talking about electric vehicles, he put aside money for ev infrastructure in the capital bill. and some of that money was used for this project. so where the stations are, um, some are with the car-sharing partners, igo, zip car at their locations. usually if there's a car-sharing car, there's a spot open to the public too. they're at oasises, they're at airports, walgreens, whole foods, jewel, they're at the mall. we have a variety of different charging stations. so part of the incentives that i mentioned, right now we have a program through dco, department of commerce and economic opportunity, that offers 50 percent of the charging station and 50 percent of the installation and that's for public stations, residential stations, profit, nonprofit, and we launched this last summer, and we're seeing an intake in those applications. then we also have a program where if you
threat towards seoul, north korean, artillery pieces and rocket launchers that can destroy the city of seoul in a matter of minutes or a few hours, if the north koreans unleash this weaponry. and they have this kind of deterrence. to threaten us and they have had it for a long period of time and we are very, very cognizant about this. another related issue in this connection though is that once north korea mounts nuclear warheads on its missiles, how is, how is that going to affect the retaliation policy? that was established between the united states and south korea in 2010, following the shelling of the young pong island in november of 2010. policy that in the future south korea would have the right to retaliate militarily, if north korea committed future provocations and the u.s. would support that kind of retaliation. what is going to happen to the u.s. and the rok attitude towards the retaliation policy once north korea has nuclear war ahead on its missiles and can threaten to rain nuclear missiles down on south korea, if south korea does retaliate? how are we going to react to
this and not cut that? that? recently the president had a series of press conferences. he embarked on a 100-city tour to warn americans of the sequester. he showed up at norfolk news -- or newport news, rather, in virginia. almost exactly one year after three of my colleagues were down there, senator graham, senator ayotte and senator mccain, saying in a year there is going to be a big problem. a year later the president shows up and says this is going to be a big problem. you know, the president proposed the sequester in 2011. he insisted that it become law. he even threatened to veto a bill. he said, i'll veto any bill to replace the sequester, late last year. and suddenly now he's changed his mind and all of these terrible things going to happen, and it's unavoidable. it's only unavoidable if we refuse to cut things that can be couple of the federal government has grown 19% in its spending in the last four years. the sequester would cut 2.4% or 2.5%. anybody in america whose budget has grown 19% in the last two years can go back now to where they were the last four years, rather, can go back
york, i'm troubled about the emerging threats as new york city is a top tear row target. we have two missions for wmd under the national guard, cutting those programs, obviously, puts us at grave risk. we have a lot of national guard contingencies and operations throughout the state which is essential for recovery efforts. we saw what an amazing job they did in hurricane sandy so i'm very concerned that with these cuts, we expose ourselves to vulnerabilities. cyber threats is the greatest threat. we do a lot of work for them in the labs, and i'm worried about our training. obviously, it's one of the premier trading operations we have for the army, and we have to keep the resources available. i'd like you to briefly talk about if you can quantify, how are the risks now elevated because of the cuts? >> well, senator, i'll answer briefly and see if one of the chiefs, in terms of their service,ment to respond. you asked the right question. how is risk elevated? so what we provide a deterrent against enemies and assurance of the allies, and then where we can't do as much deterrence or ass
, so national security issue, so and washington and mexico city the president corporation and building trust, institutional trust mexico understands the views to disagree on something we agree it is such of complicated situation but fighting drugs and trafficking, smugglers, a long way to go but we are much better when fingerpointing would have been with those differences are channels and many times to move on the agenda. but one clarification i am here is a private citizen not public official. when i talk about we it is because it is not we is them. i am hoping you take that into account. what is obvious is the geography with mexico and the destiny of loss. including rocks from columbia, arms not just central america but all over the world salute that is a huge issue. so with needs of social development the flows of people crossing territories as out papers to get to the u.s.. at the same time the source of millions of americans went out of 10 are there and now we received that now is that the core of our own perception of what are mexicans. this graph i did not have time to update bu
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)